Gay Cake Controversy!

darkpagandeath · 09-07-2014 04:52PM

Jester252 wrote: »

The baker can do what he wants with his business. If he doesn't want to make gay pride, he doesn't have to. He just needs to expect a hit to his business.

True but we have laws about discrimination, And tbh writing something on a cake in no way says you believe in it so i think he's fine that way.

gozunda · 09-07-2014 04:53PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

But they didn't discriminate based on the customer's sexual orientation. Refusing to bake him a birthday cake because of his sexuality WOULD be discrimination. Refusing to bake him a cake which bears a message they don't agree with is not discrimination.

You haven't read any of the posts previously? The Bakery representative clearly stated that "This order was at odds with our beliefs and in contradiction with what the Bible teaches" Repeat 'this order' not the message, not the colour of the icing, not the use of Bert and Ernie but the whole caboodle - the cake, icing the lot. There is no mention of 'the message' at all as the reason in the bakery's video.

As stated I have based my reply on the facts as they now stand. See the link for clarification. If you wish to substitute an alternate reality that's ok.

There was no cake with or without the message - by refusing service it was discrimination. Splitting hairs or cakes and icing in this case doesn't work.

http://www.christian.org.uk/wp-content/downloads/ashers-letter-hq.jpg

FunLover18 wrote: »

It depends on the cake. If I was order her a "happy birthday" cake and they decline because of our living situation I'd be peeved. If they declined to bake a cake with the message "living in sin for life" I wouldn't be peeved at all. In that instance do my rights to a customised cake really come ahead of the bakers religious freedom?

I don't get the instance that a perceived religious infringement is only against such beliefs and actionable when written down?

Annasopra · 09-07-2014 04:57PM

Jester252 wrote: »

The baker can do what he wants with his business.

within law

old hippy · 09-07-2014 04:59PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

The gay community are the ones who brought this into public knowledge not Ashers. Ashers didn't come out and say "Aren't we great we decided not to bake a cake supporting gay marriage". They weren't spreading any message, they merely declined (in a private phone call) to spread a message they didn't believe in.

The entire gay community brought this into public knowledge? And the entire Christian bakers community have declined, have they?

I Heart Internet wrote: »

It's going in circles because some people think that people have no right to disagree with them.

Or some people think the belief systems in place are discriminatory.

TireeTerror wrote: »

So many posts about a non-topic. Who cares if a cake is gay or not?

You obviously do.

ebbsy wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with thinking that marriage should be between a man and woman only.

Fair play to the makers of that cake.

There's nothing wrong with thinking bigoted thoughts, no. It's when you voice them and put them into action, that's where the problem is.

Fair play to the activists.

RobertKK · 09-07-2014 05:09PM

Discussing it on Newstalk now.

Politically motivated says one, the other disagrees....

floggg · 09-07-2014 05:22PM

gozunda wrote: »

Re contrary - this has been already stated in the letter sent by the EC to the Bakery See page 2

I am surprised at the way that wrote that.

It is contrary to the principles of natural justice for them to make a determination that the bakery has breached the law without first giving them an opportunity to put forward a defence.

This doesn't appear to have been done so no determination could rightly be made.

While I'm not familiar with the NI legislation I would be very surprised if they were empowered to make a determination that there has been a breach of law without hearing the bakers side.

I would suspect that no determination of fact can actually be until the court receives the complaint, and the "conclusion" that there has been a breach is premature and likely not one that has been validly made.

kunst nugget · 09-07-2014 05:29PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Discussing it on Newstalk now.

Politically motivated says one, the other disagrees....

Both are saying it's politically motivated.

Donkey Oaty · 09-07-2014 05:33PM

Anne Widdecome (aka Doris Karloff) has backed the bakery in this, and the Pink News ("Europe's largest gay news service") has carried the story.

Here's an interesting comment by one reader:

My instinct is always to disagree with Ann Widdecombe, but when it comes to the cake I can't. Equality laws are there to protect individuals from being unfairly denied goods, services, or employment. They are not there to compel people to provide a platform for political views they don't share. Otherwise, the no platform policies that we all clamour for (gay cure adverts on TfL buses, the World Congress of Families hosting a media circus at the Law Society, etc) are just as invalid.

Hande hoche! · 09-07-2014 05:40PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

Don't tell me Sky News has missed out on Brooksgate?

Just saw a report on it. :pac:

09-07-2014 06:01PM

Corkfeen wrote: »

Out of interest would you have viewed a cake that supported interracial marriage in sixties America as propaganda? I find it highly amusing what you classify as propaganda.

They wanted a message on the cake that they knew would offend the bakery owners religious leaning. They could have had the cake made elsewhere, but then they wouldn't have gotten the publicity they have. I have no problem with the message, it's the way they are using the bakery for free publicity I have a problem with.
Propoganda is information with a biased message used to promote a cause or a point of view, so yes, I would consider it propoganda.

dxhound2005 · 09-07-2014 07:10PM

What is being promoted by the message on the cake is illegal. The parliament in the North has refused to make it legal. Some people think it should be legal and they are entitled to campaign for that. Some people think it should remain illegal and they are also entitled to their point of view.

It is wrong for an arm of the state to force a business to do something which supports the thing which is illegal if the owners of that business want it to remain illegal.

Jester252 · 09-07-2014 07:24PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

True but we have laws about discrimination, And tbh writing something on a cake in no way says you believe in it so i think he's fine that way.

But was the cake refused becaue it was order by a lgbt group or because it displayed a political message.

09-07-2014 07:26PM

Jester252 wrote: »

But was the cake refused becaue it was order by a lgbt group or because it displayed a political message.

Because of the message.

Greenmachine · 09-07-2014 07:33PM

What if a catholic priest asked a gay baker to bake cake with the message.
Marraige: It's a man/woman thing.
It is what they believe.

Jester252 · 09-07-2014 07:35PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because of the message.

In that case the argument can be made that the baker doesn't do political changed goods in order to stay neutral and not cause discomfort of other customers who might have a different view.

I think the lgbt group or the discrimination board might also be in trouble for posting the letter that the baker receive.

gozunda · 09-07-2014 07:38PM

Jester252 wrote: »

But was the cake refused becaue it was order by a lgbt group or because it displayed a political message.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because of the message.

This is incorrect. There are no references to the message being ever mentioned as a reason the bakery would not provide a cake. The Bakery representative clearly stated that

"This order was at odds with our beliefs and in contradiction with what the Bible teaches"

The person who made the cake order was a representative of a group that appear to be made up of LGBT individuals. The cake was ordered for a function.

By taking the order and then refusing to provide that service ie making customised cakes they opened themselves to a claim of discrimination under the Equality Acts.

The message is largely irrelevant to what happened which is that the Equality Council believe that the Bakery has breached Equality legislation in relation to discrimination relevant to sexual orientation.

Much of this has already been discussed in previous posts. However it would appear there may be some information unaccounted for ie the Bakeries reply to the complainant / Equality Council.

Jester252 · 09-07-2014 07:41PM

gozunda wrote: »

This is incorrect. There are no references to the message being ever mentioned as a reason the bakery would not provide a cake. The Bakery representative clearly stated that

"This order was at odds with our beliefs and in contradiction with what the Bible teaches"

The person who made that order was a representative of a group that appear to be made up of LGBT individuals. The cake was ordered for a function.

By taking the order and then refusing to provide that service ie making customised coalesce they opened themselves to a claim of discrimination under the Equality Acts.

Much of this has already been discussed in previous posts. However it would appear there may be some information unaccounted for ie the Bakeries reply to the complainant / Equality Council.

If the order was for a cake with a pro same sex marriage message, that I read in other posts, then the bakers reply is pointing the problem to the message.

gozunda · 09-07-2014 07:48PM

Jester252 wrote: »

If the order was for a cake with a pro same sex marriage message, that I read in other posts, then the bakers reply is pointing the problem to the message.

The message has become largely irrelevant because the bakery representative clearly stated that "This order was at odds with our beliefs and in contradiction with what the Bible teaches". The message is not highlighted, not the cake bit, not the icing but the order of a cake made by the representative of the LGBT group.

Jester252 · 09-07-2014 07:54PM

gozunda wrote: »

The message has become irrelevant because the bakery representative clearly stated that "This order was at odds with our beliefs and in contradiction with what the Bible teaches". The message is not highlighted, not the cake bit, not the icing but the order of a cake made by the representative of the LGBT group.

The order includes the message. Also seen as he uses "This order" he never said he had an issue with the people who placed the order.

gozunda · 09-07-2014 08:02PM

Jester252 wrote: »

The order includes the message. Also seen as he uses "This order" he never said he had an issue with the people who placed the order.

Take a read back through the posts on previous pages. It's all there including the letter sent to the bakery by the EC. The issue with that the discrimination is embodied in the person who made the order and was refused service. The order didn't turn up at the bakery on its own. Where a person is refused a service and they believe they were discriminated because of sexual orientation or other reasons including race, religion, gender etc they can bring a case. Read the letter a few posts back for further clarification.

Jester252 · 09-07-2014 08:07PM

gozunda wrote: »

Take a read back through the posts on previous pages. It's all there including the letter sent to the bakery by the EC. The issue with that the discrimination is embodied in the person who made the order and was refused service. The order didn't turn up at the bakery on its own. Where a person is refused a service and they believe they were discriminated because of sexual orientation or other reasons including race, religion, gender etc they can bring a case. Read the letter a few posts back for further clarification.

I read the letter. Just because someone felt discriminated doesn't mean they were.

gozunda · 09-07-2014 08:11PM

Jester252 wrote: »

I read the letter. Just because someone felt discriminated doesn't mean they were.

That was the letter from the EC - they have stated that the bakery is in breach of legislation. Maybe take it up with them? But at the end of the day the bakery clearly refused the individuals order.

kowloon · 09-07-2014 08:14PM

bluewolf wrote: »

I'd be annoyed if a black bakery owner couldn't refuse custom to white harassers. Or the latest irish branch of the kkk

I was just trying to say Cake. I have a stutter and it came out badly.

dxhound2005 · 09-07-2014 08:58PM

gozunda wrote: »

This is incorrect. There are no references to the message being ever mentioned as a reason the bakery would not provide a cake. The Bakery representative clearly stated that

"This order was at odds with our beliefs and in contradiction with what the Bible teaches"

The person who made the cake order was a representative of a group that appear to be made up of LGBT individuals. The cake was ordered for a function.

By taking the order and then refusing to provide that service ie making customised cakes they opened themselves to a claim of discrimination under the Equality Acts.

The message is largely irrelevant to what happened which is that the Equality Council believe that the Bakery has breached Equality legislation in relation to discrimination relevant to sexual orientation.

Much of this has already been discussed in previous posts. However it would appear there may be some information unaccounted for ie the Bakeries reply to the complainant / Equality Council.

But there is no heading in the equality legislation covering marriage. The message on the cake is Support Gay Marriage. Gay marriage is not recognised by the state. So it cannot breach equality legislation to refuse to provide goods which support it.

If the order had been refused because the person who placed it had identified themselves as being gay then that would come under the equality legislation. Being gay is recognised as a particular sexual orientation which is equal to others but having the right to gay marriage is outlawed and a business should not be forced to provide goods which supports something which is outlawed.

They might just as easily have refused to put Legalise Cannabis on the cake and there could be no case against them under the equality legislation unless the person who placed the order identified themselves as being gay and that was the reason the order was refused. Bakeries should not be forced to put political messages on their cakes if they don't want to.

FunLover18 · 09-07-2014 09:54PM

The Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006

5. (1) It is unlawful for any person concerned with the provision (for payment or not) of goods, facilities or services to the public or a section of the public to discriminate against a person who seeks to obtain or use those goods, facilities or services —
(a)by refusing or deliberately omitting to provide him with any of them; or
(b)by refusing or deliberately omitting to provide him with goods, facilities or services of the same quality, in the same manner and on the same terms as are normal in his case in relation to other members of the public or (where the person seeking belongs to a section of the public) to other members of that section.

As far as I can see Ashers are perfectly within their rights under Section B. Unless the EC can prove that Ashers would have baked the order for heterosexual client … which is unlikely given that the order was in contrast with their religious beliefs.

Case closed.

Awkward Badger · 09-07-2014 10:10PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

As far as I can see Ashers are perfectly within their rights under Section B. Unless the EC can prove that Ashers would have baked the order for heterosexual client … which is unlikely given that the order was in contrast with their religious beliefs.

Case Cake closed.

FYP.

gozunda · 09-07-2014 10:55PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

But there is no heading in the equality legislation covering marriage. The message on the cake is Support Gay Marriage. Gay marriage is not recognised by the state. So it cannot breach equality legislation to refuse to provide goods which support it.

......
.

Boy! that is quite the most mixed up logic I have met in a long time.

As clearly stated the breach of Equality legislation was that the bakery discriminated in not providing a service on the basis of the customers sexual orientation by their own admission. The customer asked for a cake - no cake was provided. The 'message' is of no relevance whatsoever.
Please read the Equality Commission letter if the logic of this needs further clarification ok?

Btw are you suggesting those who are Gay all smoke dope?!!!

Awkward Badger · 09-07-2014 11:01PM

gozunda wrote: »

Boy! that is quite the most mixed up logic I have met in a long time.

As clearly stated the breach of Equality legislation was that the bakery discriminated in not providing a service on the basis of the customers sexual orientation by their own admission. The customer asked for a cake - no cake was provided. The 'message' is of no relevance whatsoever.
Please read the Equality Commission letter if the logic of this needs further clarification ok?

Show me this please. The bakery admitting that it was the sexuality of the customer and not the cake that was the reason they declined to make it.

FunLover18 · 09-07-2014 11:05PM

gozunda wrote: »

Boy! that is quite the most mixed up logic I have met in a long time.

As clearly stated the breach of Equality legislation was that the bakery discriminated in not providing a service on the basis of the customers sexual orientation by their own admission. The customer asked for a cake - no cake was provided. The 'message' is of no relevance whatsoever.
Please read the Equality Commission letter if the logic of this needs further clarification ok?

Go read the Equality Act this beloved letter of your refers to. Any customer could have asked for that cake and Ashers would have declined. No discrimination.

gozunda · 09-07-2014 11:05PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

As far as I can see Ashers are perfectly within their rights under Section B. Unless the EC can prove that Ashers would have baked the order for heterosexual client … which is unlikely given that the order was in contrast with their religious beliefs.

Case closed.

Lol
You might want to reference the exact act that you are quoting. All I can suggest is that you take it up with the Equality Commission and tell them you have sorted it for them and they are evidently wrong. The EC don't have to prove any imaginary scenario...

Ps Section B doesn't make any sense with what you have put forward as the 'solution'.

I doubt somehow. The 'case' will not be solved by keyboard warriors anyway

Gay Cake Controversy!

Comments